A senior civil servant has told chief constables to end public debate on what many top officers see as the creeping centralisation of Scottish policing.
Bridget Campbell, the official in charge of police and community safety at the Scottish Government, sparked outrage by saying open discussion on the future role of a new centralised support agency was "unhelpful".
Her remarks, in a letter to the chief constables and boards of Scotland's eight regional forces, come as police chiefs become increasingly concerned about what one insider called "landgrabbing" by the Scottish Police Services Authority (SPSA).
The Herald yesterday revealed that one of the government's most senior advisers believed the SPSA, which was set up last year by the old Labour-Liberal coalition, should take over key roles, such as serious fraud, counter terrorism and motorway policing.
Scotland's biggest force, Strathclyde, has the most to lose from any SPSA expansion. Its new chief constable, Steve House, has made it clear he believes transferring functions from his force to the SPSA would hurt frontline policing.
Ms Campbell in her letter, which was written before yesterday's revelations in The Herald, said: "I think that further public debate about these matters would be unhelpful."
Mr House, speaking at Strathclyde's ruling joint police board yesterday, made it clear that he had no intention of biting his tongue.
Referring to Ms Campbell's letter, he said: "They wish the debate to take place behind closed doors. I don't think that is appropriate. Silence is taken as acquiesence, I am afraid.
"Effectively the SPSA is being promoted as a national solution for policing in Scotland. It is a solution for the seven other forces, not Strathclyde, because our services will get worse. We can't accept that."
SPSA has already taken over control of all forensic science in Scotland. Senior officers openly say they are still not happy with the quality of that service. The authority also oversees the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency and criminal records and, from April 1, will take over IT for all eight forces.
Mr House won full backing for his position from his board and its convener, Paul Rooney, a Labour councillor from Glasgow.
"I am pleased the chief constable is taking a stance on this," Mr Rooney said.
Ms Campbell's letter angered several members of the board. Christopher Mason, a Glasgow Liberal Democrat, said: "I have never before known a civil servant try to tell people, including elected members, that they must stop a public debate. It is extreme arrogance, I think.
"In fact, there is an urgent need for an extended public debate about these issues."
A spokesman for the Scottish Government said: "Of course there will be debate about the right way forward. We welcome that. But decisions on whether SPSA should have additional functions in the future will be for ministers in consultation with the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland (Acpos) and police boards. There are already well-understood channels for that consultation."
The SPSA also said it was happy to see its role thrashed out in public.
Its chief executive, David Mulhern, said: "SPSA brings one of the biggest changes in how we provide policing services to the Scottish community in over 30 years.
"As our organisation develops we welcome feedback and encourage debate on the future direction of support services for Scottish policing."
Peter Wilson, Chief Constable of Fife and Honorary Secretary of Acpos, said: "We welcome the fact that mech- anisms are being put in place through which consideration can be given to the question of further transfer of functions to the SPSA."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article